Sacerdote v. New York University
- Analisa Torres
- 1:16-cv-06284
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Sacerdote v. New York University, Judge Torres stayed further litigation until the Supreme Court resolves specified related matters.
The stay affects the Plaintiffs and New York University by pausing further litigation in the case until the specified Supreme Court proceedings are resolved.
What happened
In Sacerdote v. New York University, the Second Circuit had sent some issues back to the district court, including Plaintiffs’ claim concerning lower-cost mutual-fund share classes in employee retirement plans. The case involves whether those allegations state a claim that New York University breached its duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
New York University asked the court to pause the case while the Supreme Court considered Hughes v. Northwestern University and New York University’s request for Supreme Court review in this case. Plaintiffs did not oppose the request. New York University said a pause would avoid unnecessary work and clarify an issue sent back to the district court.
Judge Analisa Torres granted the motion. The case is stayed until the Supreme Court issues an opinion in Hughes or, if it accepts review in this case, issues an opinion in New York University v. Sacerdote, whichever is later. The parties must file a joint update within seven days after a Supreme Court opinion in either matter.
The detailed version
- Sacerdote v. New York University · No. 1:16-cv-06284
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 23, 2021
Background
The parties jointly updated the court after the Second Circuit issued an opinion on August 16, 2021, and its mandate issued on September 7, 2021. According to the filing, the Second Circuit affirmed some of the district court’s decisions but vacated the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ share-class claim, vacated the denial of leave to amend for further consideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, and vacated the denial of Plaintiffs’ motions under Rules 52(b) and 59(e).
The share-class claim concerns allegations that New York University offered retail-class shares of certain mutual funds instead of available lower-cost institutional-class shares in its employee retirement plans. The stated legal issue is whether those allegations claim a breach of the fiduciary duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
Motion to Stay
New York University moved under Local Civil Rule 7.1(d) and the judge’s individual rules to stay further litigation. It asked the court to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University and for the Supreme Court to resolve New York University’s petition for review in this case. New York University argued that the Supreme Court’s decisions could provide guidance on an issue remanded to the district court and would promote efficiency. Plaintiffs did not oppose the motion, and the filing states that all parties consented to it.
Ruling
The court granted the motion. The case shall be stayed until the Supreme Court issues an opinion in Hughes v. Northwestern University or, if the Supreme Court grants the pending petition for review in New York University v. Sacerdote, until the Supreme Court issues an opinion in that case, whichever is later. The parties must file a joint status report within seven days after a Supreme Court opinion in either matter, updating the court on the consequences for this case.
This order paused further litigation; it did not decide the merits of the share-class claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.